The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-05-05
But Will Instruct the Attornev-General to
Bring Suit Against Him in the Courts
on BehalfOfthe Libeled Irish Member.
A General Belief that the Newspaper
People Will Escape Prosecution.
Extraordinary Precautions for Safe Keeping
Of French Military Secrets-The sCzar
Decides to Undertake a Journey.
The Government Declines to Summon the
Editor Before the Bar of the House.


| in the House of Commons, this afternoon that
| the govern ment had resolved that the allegation
that the statement by the London Times that
| Mr. Dillon told fasehood while denying, in the
House of Commons, that papers utterances con-
cerning his alleged relations with Sheridan, the
Invincible breach of privilege, was not
sustained by precedent Continuing Mr. Smith
said it would be against the dignity of the
House to summon the Times to the bar without
previously inquiring into the circumstances. The
gentleman below the gangway, Mr.. Smith added,
asked that select committee be constituted to
inquire forthwith into the allegations of the
Times. The practice of the House had been to
dvest itself, far possible. of judicial duty.
The government thought such committee
was asked for would be untitled to consider such
grave questions would have to be referred to
It for decision. The government feeling it to be
their duty to endeavor to solve the question, had
instructed the Attorney-general and such others
as he cared to associate with him, to prosecute
the Times for the libel on Mr.. Dillon, who was at
liberty to select such counsel as he saw fit. In
conclusion, Mr.. Smith urged the House to accept
the course proposed.
Mr.. T. p. OConpor condem ned the govern
ment's proposal He said he commiserated the
government their humiliatine and degrading
position. lnelr proposal was really I1f coiuSlV0
action at law. made by the vendor of the libel
Mr. OConnor here procured copy OF the Times
containing the libel on Mr.. Dillon, and. flourish
ing it aloft he said: II purchased this copy of
the Times at one of the book stalls owned by the
Right Hon. First Lord of the Treasury. 1t is
he, speaking for the government, who says
breach of privilege was committed. Irish
Cheersl He is, therefore. deeply interested
a party in the case against the editor of the
Times The two men ought to be in the dock
together The Irish members reject his pro-
posal as unfair, unjust and unprecedented The
House of Commons ought not to be taken in by
collusive action"
Here Mr. Edwin J. L. P. De Lisle (Conserva-
tive). member for Middle Leicestershire, arose
to a puia. of order. He said he ha- heard 2Ir
Charles KearnEdeane Tanner Home
member for Middle Cork, say the CONSERVATIVES
were id lot of cads" Irish voices: 80 you
are
Speaker Peel-The Clerk of the House will
please see that the words are taken down
Mr. Tanner denied that he had used the word
damned" He repeated, however, that the Con-
servatives were lot of cads.
The Speaker said he must withdraw the ex-
preston and apologize
Mr.. Tanner said he would do
governments proposals.
Sir Edward Clarke, Solicitor general, moved
an amendment to the governments proposal to
the effect that the House did not consider the
Times's statement concerning Mr.. Dillon
breach of privilege. Justifying his action in
Offering the amendment, Sir Edward declared
that there was no record of Parliament
having committed man to custody for
breach OF privilege, such as the
ton of the Times is alleged to be-
He added that be and the Attorney general were
responsible for the advice which the govern
ment has acted. He proposed to confne himself
to the legal points of the case, regardless of
party politics. He then quoted precedents to
show that the House was not the proper tribunal
to deal with such matters. No corruption had
been alleged of member, nor had any con
tempt of the House been exhibited such AS had
constituted the offense in previous where
breach of privilege had been committed. The
course of the prosecution. the Solicitor general
said, would be left to such persons as the Irish
members might nominate. both counsel and
solicitors If the government were asked to aD-
point them, they would interpose objection.
In conclusion, Sir Edward slightly modified his
amendment. making it read that the House de-
clines to treat the Ilmess publication as
breach of privilege.
Mr.. Charles Russell, ex-Attorney-eeneral.
tended that, iuasmuch as there had been made
an attack upon the conduct of Mr.. Dillon, while
in the House of Commons, in his capacity as
member thereof, the allegations made against
him constituted breach of privilege. In this
view he said. action should be taken to protect
the honor of the members of the House.
Lord Randolph Churchill said that. while he
would admit that the case against the
Times presented prima facie evidence of
breach of privilege. he felt impelled to say that
the House had not declined institute judicial
INQUIRY into the matter. The only point of diff
ference between the majority and the Parnellite
members seemed to be the form of making an
inquiry. Resort to the law, he thought, was
much better method of investigation thar TO de-
pend upon the action of the Eouse for
edy. In the course Of his argument Lord Ran
dolph made reference to the conduct of Mr.
Gladstone, which he characterized as taking the
lead in agitation outside the House for the re-
peal of the Union.
Mr.. Gladstone repudiated Lord Churshill's i'm
putation.
Lord Churchill. continuing said it was useless
to disguise the truth that. should the pub
Usher OF the Times be brought before the bar Of
the House, it would have effect whatever in
curbng the power of the press of the country.
Mr.. Dillon said he did not consider the oIdi-
nary tribunals of the country as open to
bers of the Parnelite party, and therefore, he
maintained his right to he heard before a select
committee. He would decline to take
action against the Times in
court of law because he did not
believe it possible for him to get a just verdict.
owing to the prejudices which a jury composed
of Englishman would have against members Of
his party.
Mr.. Gladstone iutimated that in event of the
motion offered by alr. Clark being adopted. he
would move an amendment TO the main QueS-
ton, to the effect that inquiry be made into
charges of willful falsehood IN speech deliv-
cred in the House, brought by article pub
lished in the Times against Mr. Dillon.
W. Ell. Smith asked if Gladstone would make
that motion at once.
Mr.. Gladstone said ne was surprised at the
suggestion, coming. it did, from the govern
ment leader in the House. For him (Gladstone
to make such motion at the present time would
be only making confusion and it would tend TO
obscure the issue If the course suggested by Mr..
Smith were followed.
On motion of Mr.. Bradlaugh the debate was
adjourned.
The Times in editorial referring to Dir.
Lews's motion that the House of Commons take
says:
I'VE are unable why Mr.. Lewis felt
called upon to protest We have no objection TO